Oklahoma Injury Lawyer Blog

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently reversed a trial court's grant of summary judgment to an employer in a lawsuit brought under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. In the case, the employer presented evidence that, although the supervisor who fired her stated that she was terminated for violating company policy, she had done nothing wrong. Nevertheless, the employer is expected to pay a six-figure amount to settle the case.

According to a recent article in Forbes, giving false reasons for firing employees is not uncommon. Employers routinely give false reasons for firing employees, even when the true reason is perfectly legal, because the true reason is difficult to deliver. For example, it is much easier to tell a subordinate that they broke company policy, than that his customers have turned in numerous negative reviews for him.

This tends to become problematic if the employee later files a lawsuit against the employer, because the employer cannot have the case dismissed in its early stages if the reason for termination is questionable. Oklahoma state law protects employees from being wrongfully terminated based on discrimination, therefore a jury would have the opportunity to decide whether they think some sort of discrimination was the reason for the termination.

Provided that an employee is fired for lawful reasons, the best way to prevent future lawsuits from terminated employees is to provide the true reasons for termination. Although this may provide for an uncomfortable meeting, it will avoid the bad publicity a prolonged lawsuit may cause. It could also save your company thousands or even millions of dollars in an unfavorable verdict.

According to a recent statement from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), popular clothing retailer Wet Seal illegally discriminated against a former store manager after determining that there were too many African-American employees at her store.

As reported in The New York Times, management for Wet Seal has openly declared that they prefer to have employees who have the "Armani look, were white, had blue eyes, thin and blonde in order to be profitable." African American store manager Nicole Codgell was fired a day after Wet Seal senior vice president for store operations inspected several stores, including hers. After the inspections, the senior vice president sent an email stating, "African Americans dominate -- huge issue."

Representatives for Wet Seal claim that Codgell voluntarily resigned. However, the EEOC found that the email from Wet Seal senior vice president for store operations, as well as the company's sudden firing of multiple African-American employees from their Pennsylvania stores, created a hostile work environment in which Codgell was forced to exit. Before Codgell's departure, her store was ranked 8th of over 500 Wet Seal stores nationwide. The EEOC has indicated that it would seek "a just resolution of this matter" through negotiations.

So, you've been issued a "Right to Sue" letter by the EEOC.  Does this mean you have a great case and all you need is an attorney to file your lawsuit? 

No.  You may have a good case (or even no case), but a Right to Sue letter is not decisive of anything.   It simply means that the EEOC isn't going to represent you, but you still have a right to pursue your claim.  This seems counter intuitive, but let me repeat: the EEOC hasn't concluded anything by issuing this letter - except that they won't be pursuing your claim. 

The EEOC gets about 80,000 charges of discrimination each year but only files about 300 lawsuits a year.  Private employment law attorneys handle the rest of the cases.  Note that the EEOC must first issue a Right to Sue letter before an attorney can file a lawsuit.  That's why your first step should be to contact the local EEOC office.  Here's the information for the Oklahoma City office:

The EEOC office also provides a lot of informative handouts to help walk you through the process. 

We have a lot of people call our office with a question similar to this.  Oklahoma is an employment "at will" state.  This means that you (the employee) or your boss could end the employment relationship at anytime for no reason at all.  So, the answer to this question is: This isn't wrongful termination.  The facts from the firing may be "out of line," but it's not against the law.  There are exceptions to employment at will.  For example, it's illegal to fire someone based on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and for initiating a workers compensation claim.

The Tulsa World reported this week a Mannford woman is suing for wrongful termination after she reported nursing home abuse and neglect of facility's residents. 

Some of the disturbing parts of the article:

"Mrs. Harris observed a male resident who had been left in his own waste for so many hours that he had feces caked on to his leg from his hip to below his knee, and had wet himself at least one time," the petition said.

[S]he saw the man sitting in his waste and reported it to her supervisor, the head nurse and two nurse's aides. Her supervisor sprayed deodorant in the man's room to cover the smell. The aides said they would leave him for the next shift.

"Two and a half hours later, he was still sitting in his own waste," Harris said. "He couldn't say nothing. I would always talk to him. He would just light up when I went to clean his room. It's heartbreaking when you see a resident not being taken care of."

[A]n elderly woman paralyzed from the waist down was left in her own waste, Harris said. She rolled out of the bed and into the hallway to get someone to change her soiled garments and the nurses "just laughed at her," Harris said.

Harris reported each instance of neglect or abuse to the facility's staff. But once the staff learned she intended to seek the advice of her husband, Jerry, a retired private investigator known for exposing elder abuse, she was fired, the petition said.

Note that Mrs. Harris was only an employee of the nursing home for 3 months!

We had a mediation scheduled today at 1:30 p.m. for a wrongful termination case here in Oklahoma City.  Opposing counsel gave me a call late afternoon yesterday to see if we could go ahead and reach a settlement.  We ended up reaching a compromise about 15 minutes ago - that's literally hours before the mediation was to begin.  Props (and a thank you!) to Jake Jones, the mediator we were scheduled with, for not charging us any costs for canceling so late. 

The vast majority of cases settle without going to trial.  Here are some interesting national statistics according to a United States Justice Department study:

• About 97 percent of civil cases are settled or dismissed without a trial
• Plaintiffs won 55 percent of the cases surveyed
• Plaintiffs won less than one-third of medical malpractice trials in 2001

(source: Phoenix Business Journal)

The case that settled today involved a wrongful termination of an employee that was injured at work.  The employer "had to let go" the worker shortly after he was injured at the company.  It is illegal under Oklahoma law (85 O.S. § 5), to fire an employee for initiating, or filing, a worker's compensation claim.